Default Sarcastic Interpretations: On the Priority of Nonsalient Interpretations

Discourse Processes

Volumn 52, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 173-200

  Giora, Rachel ^a   Drucker, Ari ^a   Fein, Ofer ^b   Mendelson, Itamar ^a  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b ACADEMIC COLLEGE OF TEL AVIV YAFFO   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84926407139     PISSN: 0163853X     EISSN: 15326950     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2014.954951     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Anonymous. (2010, August 18). Retrieved from http://anitasayer-hicksonsbrainpan.blogspot.co.il/2010/08/what-makes-good-father.html.
2. ArielM. (2008). Pragmatics and grammar. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3. BarbeK. (1993). “Isn't it ironic that…?”: Explicit irony markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 20, 578–590.
4. BeardsleyC. M. (1958). Aesthetics. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace and World.
5. BirnerB. J., & WardG. (1998). Information status and noncanonical word order in English. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
6. BolingerD. (1972). Degree words. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton.
7. BryantG. A., & Fox TreeJ. E. (2002). Recognizing verbal irony in spontaneous speech. Metaphor and Symbol, 17, 99–117.
8. BybeeJ. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind's response to repetition. Language, 82, 711–733.
9. CampbellJ. D., & KatzA. N. (2012). Are there necessary conditions for inducing a sense of sarcastic irony?Discourse Processes, 49, 459–480.
10. CarstonR. (1996). Metalinguistic negation and echoic use. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 309–330.
11. CarstonR. (2010). Metaphor: Ad hoc concepts, literal meaning and mental images. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, cx(Part 3), 295–321.
12. CarstonR., & WearingC. (2011). Metaphor, hyperbole and simile: A pragmatic approach. Language and Cognition, 3, 283–312.
13. CaucciG. M., & KreuzR. J. (2012). Social and paralinguistic cues to sarcasm. Humor, 25, 1–22.
14. ChapmanS. (1993). Metalinguistic negation, sentences and utterances. Newcastle and Durham Working Papers in Linguistics, 1, 74–94.
15. ChapmanS. (1996). Some observations on metalinguistic negation. Journal of Linguistics, 32, 387–402.
16. ClarkH. H. (1970). Word associations and linguistic theory. In J.Lyons (Ed.), New horizons in linguistic theory (pp. 271–286). London, UK: Penguin.
17. ColstonH. L., & GibbsR. W.Jr. (2002). Are irony and metaphor understood differently?Metaphor and Symbol, 17, 57–80.
18. CroftW. (2007). Construction grammar. In D.Geeraerts & H.Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 463–508). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
19. ErmanB., & WarrenB. (2000). The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text, 20, 29–62.
20. FeinO., YeariM., & GioraR. (2015). On the priority of salience-based interpretations: The case of irony. Intercultural Pragmatics, 12(1), 1–32.
21. FilikR., LeutholdH., WallingtonK., & PageJ. (2014). Testing theories of irony processing using eye-tracking and ERPs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 811–828.
22. FilikR., & MoxeyL. M. (2010). The on-line processing of written irony. Cognition, 116, 421–436.
23. FillmoreC. J., KayP., & O'ConnorM. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language, 64, 501–538.
24. GibbsR. W.Jr. (1980). Spilling the beans on understanding and memory for idioms in conversation. Memory & Cognition, 8, 449–456.
25. GibbsR. W.Jr. (1981). Your wish is my command: Convention and context in interpreting indirect requests. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 431–444.
26. GibbsR. W.Jr. (1986a). Comprehension and memory for nonliteral utterances: The problem of sarcastic indirect requests. Acta Psychologica, 62, 41–57.
27. GibbsR. W.Jr. (1986b). On the psycholinguistics of sarcasm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 3–15.
28. GibbsR. W.,Jr. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
29. GibbsR. W.Jr. (2002). A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 457–486.
30. GioraR. (1995). On irony and negation. Discourse Processes, 19, 239–264.
31. GioraR. (1997). Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics, 7, 183–206.
32. GioraR. (1999). On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 919–929.
33. GioraR. (2003). On our mind: Salience, context, and figurative language. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
34. GioraR. (2006). Anything negatives can do affirmatives can do just as well, except for some metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 981–1014. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.12.006.
35. GioraR. (2011). Will anticipating irony facilitate it immediately? In M.Dynel (Ed.), The pragmatics of humour across discourse domains (pp. 19–31). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
36. GioraR., BalabanN., FeinO., & AlkabetsI. (2005). Negation as positivity in disguise. In L.Herbert & A.Katz (Eds.), Figurative language comprehension: Social and cultural influences (pp. 233–258). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37. GioraR., & FeinO. (1999). Irony: Context and salience. Metaphor and Symbol, 14, 241–257.
38. GioraR., FeinO., GanziJ., Alkeslassy LeviN., & SabahH. (2005). Negation as mitigation: The case of negative irony. Discourse Processes, 39, 81–100.
39. GioraR., FeinO., KaufmanR., EisenbergD., & ErezS. (2009). Does an “ironic situation” favor an ironic interpretation? In G.Brône & J.Vandaele (Eds.), Cognitive poetics: Goal, gain and gaps (pp. 383–399). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
40. GioraR., FeinO., LaadanD., WolfsonJ., ZeitunyM., KidronR., KaufmanR., & ShahamR. (2007). Expecting irony: Context vs. salience-based effects. Metaphor and Symbol, 22, 119–146.
41. GioraR., FeinO., MetukiN., & SternP. (2010). Negation as a metaphor-inducing operator. In L.Horn (Ed.), The expression of negation (pp. 225–256). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
42. GioraR., FeinO., & SchwartzT. (1998). Irony: Graded salience and indirect negation. Metaphor and Symbol, 13, 83–101.
43. GioraR., LivnatE., FeinO., BarneaA., ZeimanR., & BergerI. (2013). Negation generates nonliteral interpretations by default. Metaphor and Symbol, 28, 89–115.
44. GivoniS., GioraR., & BergerbestD. (2013). How speakers alert addressees to multiple meanings. Journal of Pragmatics, 48, 29–40.
45. GlucksbergS. (2001). Understanding figurative language: From metaphors to idioms. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
46. GoldbergA. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
47. GriceH. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P.Cole & J.Morgan (Eds.), Speech acts: Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3, pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.
48. GriesS. T., & OtaniN. (2010). Behavioral profiles: A corpus-based perspective on synonymy and antonymy. ICAME Journal, 34, 121–150.
49. HornL. R. (1985). Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language, 61, 121–174.
50. HornL. R. (1989). A natural history of negation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
51. IsraelM. (2006). The pragmatics of polarity. In L.Horn & G.Ward (Eds.), Handbook of pragmatics (pp. 701–723). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
52. IsraelM. (2011). The grammar of polarity: Pragmatics, sensitivity, and the logic of scales. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
53. JaszczoltK. M. (2005). Prolegomena to default semantics. In S.Marmaridou, K.Nikiforidou, & E.Antonopoulou (Eds.), Reviewing linguistic thought: Converging trends for the 21st century (pp. 107–142). Berlin, Germany: Mouton.
54. JaszczoltK. M. (2011). Default meanings, salient meanings, and automatic processing. In K. M.Jaszczolt & K.Allan (Eds.), Salience and defaults in utterance processing (pp. 11–34). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
55. JonesS., MurphyM. L., ParadisC., & WillnersC. (2012). Antonyms in English: Construals, constructions and canonicity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
56. KaakinenJ. K., OlkoniemiH., KinnariT., & HyönäJ. (2014). Processing of written irony: An eye movement study. Discourse Processes, 51, 287–311.
57. KatzA. N. (2009). Commentary on “Does an ironic situation favor an ironic interpretation.” In G.Brône & J.Vandaele (Eds.), Cognitive poetics. Goals, gains and gaps (pp. 401–406). Berlin, Germany:Mouton de Gruyter.
58. KatzA. N., BlaskoD. G., & KazmerskiV. A. (2004). Saying what you don't mean: Social influences on sarcastic language processing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 186–189.
59. KatzA. N., & FerrettiT. R. (2003). Reading proverbs in context: The role of explicit markers. Discourse Processes, 36, 19–46.
60. KecskésI. (1999). The use of situation-bound utterances from an interlanguage perspective. In J.Verscheuren (Ed.), Pragmatics in 1998: Selected papers from the 6th International Pragmatics Conference (Vol. 2, pp. 299–310). Antwerp, Belgium: International Pragmatics Association.
61. KecskésI. (2000). A cognitive-pragmatic approach to situation-bound utterances. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 605–625.
62. KeysarB. (1989). On the functional equivalence of literal and metaphorical interpretations in discourse. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 375–385.
63. KovazD., KreuzR. J., & RiordanM. A. (2013). Distinguishing sarcasm from literal language: Evidence from books and blogging. Discourse Processes, 50, 598–615.
64. KreuzR. J., & CaucciG. M. (2007). Lexical influences on the perception of sarcasm. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Approaches to Figurative Language (pp. 1–4). Rochester, NY: Association for Computational Linguistics.
65. LeechG. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London, UK: Longman.
66. LevinsonS. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
67. MarzlufJ. (August 4, 2011). Discussion board comment on “The Oboe Bboard” website. Retrieved from http://test.woodwind.org/oboe/BBoard/read.html?f=10&i=18711&t=18711&v=f.
68. MashalN., FaustM., HendlerT., & Jung-BeemanM. (2008). Hemispheric differences in processing the literal interpretation of idioms: Converging evidence from behavioral and fMRI studies. Cortex, 44, 848–860.
69. OrtonyA., SchallertD. L., ReynoldsR. E., & AntosS. J. (1978). Interpreting metaphors and idioms: Some effects of context on comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 465–478.
70. ParadisC., WillnersC., & JonesS. (2009). Good and bad opposites: Using textual and experimental techniques to measure antonym canonicity. The Mental Lexicon, 4, 380–429.
71. PartingtonA. (2011). Phrasal irony: Its form, function and exploitation. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 1786–1800.
72. PexmanP. M., FerrettiT. R., & KatzA. N. (2000). Discourse factors that influence on-line reading of metaphor and irony. Discourse Processes, 29, 201–222.
73. PrinceE. F. (1981). Topicalization, focus-movement, and Yiddish-movement: A pragmatic differentiation. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 7, 249–264.
74. RécanatiF. (1995). The alleged priority of literal meaning. Cognitive Science, 19, 207–232.
75. RockwellP. (2000). Lower, slower, louder: Vocal cues of sarcasm. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 483–493.
76. RockwellP. (2007). Vocal features of conversational sarcasm: A comparison of methods. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 36, 361–369.
77. SearleJ. (1979). Expression and meaning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
78. SperberD., & WilsonD. (1986/1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
79. TrussellA. (2012, January 26). Where is your heart? Retrieved from http://www.fccspringfieldil.net/creative-comments/where-is-your-heart.
80. UtsumiA. (2000). Verbal irony as implicit display of ironic environment: Distinguishing ironic utterances from nonirony. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1777–1806.
81. van de WeijerJ., ParadisC., WillnersC., & LindgrenM. (2012). As lexical as it gets: The role of co-occurrence of antonyms in a visual lexical decision experiment. In D.Divjak & S. T.Gries (Eds.), Frequency effects in language representations (Vol. 2, pp. 255–280). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
82. VealeT. (2012). Exploding the creativity myth: The computational foundations of linguistic creativity. London, UK: Continuum International Publishing Group.
83. VealeT. (2013). Humorous similes. Humor, 26, 3–22.
84. VoyerD., & TechentinC. (2010). Subjective acoustic features of sarcasm: Lower, slower, and more. Metaphor and Symbol, 25, 1–16.
85. *. Papers in Linguistics, 17, 145–161.
86. WardG., & BirnerB. J. (2006). Information structure. In B.Aarts & A.McMahon (Eds.), Handbook of English linguistics (pp. 291–317). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.